EOs bear a resemblance to monarchy!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

MIMIC MONARCHY!

by Steve Fair

     On Saturday protesters across the United States took to the streets to demonstrate against Trump administration policy.  Dubbed the ‘No Kings’ protest, over 2,000 cities across the country had people waving signs showing their displeasure with ‘authoritarian overreach and billionaire influence in the U.S. government.’   The No Kings movement claims to be concerned about the erosion of democratic values and believe the power should reside with the people and not a singular authority.  Most Americans would agree with that.  No Kings claim America has become an oligarchy (government controlled by a small group) or a plutocracy (government controlled by the wealthy).

     Estimates of the total number of No Kings protesters ranged from 500,000 to 5,000,000 nationwide.  There were a couple of cities where acts of violence broke out, but overall, the protests were peaceful.  Three observations:

     First, America is not a pure democracy.   It never has been.  In a pure democracy, citizens directly participate in making laws and other decisions.  For example, in ancient Athens, citizens gathered to vote on policies directly.  That is impractical for large populations and susceptible to a tyranny of the majority- mob rule.  America is a democratic republic-a constitutional republic.  Citizens vote for representatives to govern them (make and enforce laws), according to the Constitution.  America is ruled by those that show up at the polls.        

     Second, the use of executive orders (EO) is excessive.  Using EOs to govern does bear a striking resemblance to a monarchy.  Presidents are using EOs more because of a lack of collaboration/cooperation within the legislative branch.  If they don’t use them, America is governed by bureaucrats within federal agencies. 

    EOs are directives issued by the president to manage the operation of the federal government.  Because an EO offers a quicker and more certain path to implementation, presidents often have chosen to circumvent Congress rather than wrangle with stubborn lawmakers.  EOs use rises during periods of political polarization and gridlock.  The ‘No Kings’ movement has been critical of Trump’s use of EOs, but were eerily silent when Biden used the same tool while in the Oval Office.  Overuse of EOs is bi-partisan, but don’t expect it to change overnight.  The polarization of America is reflected in their elected officials and Congress can’t agree on what direction the sun comes up.

     Third, consolidation of political power is real.  Because less and less Americans pay attention to their government (at all levels), special interests- on both ends of the political spectrum- get their lackey/ flunky elected and dictate how they will act/vote.  Constituents they represent are ignored and only campaign donors are heeded.   Special interests then fire up the public with clever marketing and exaggerated caricatured claims to make sure the subservient puppet elected official stays in office.  Like a firebrand evangelist, they preach hell hot for those who disagree with their political philosophy.  Citizens who dare to not engage in political ‘group think,’ are routinely branded unpatriotic, establishment, irrelevant and ignorant by friends and family.  Partisans condemn everything their political enemy does and affirm everything their standard-bearer espouses and practice blind loyalty. 

     Until there is a decentralization of political thought and more critical thinking by the average voter, expect more the same polarizing environment, resulting in more EOs and a mimic monarchy.

     America has never been a democracy, so no one day stunt will ‘restore democracy.’   But all Americans should be concerned about the consolidation of power in the country.  They should recognize continuing down this uncivil path of destruction threatens our way of life.  In America, a person should be able to disagree with the mob without being burned at the stake. 

Newscum is dashing his hopes to occupy the White House!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

ILLEGAL IS ILLEGAL

by Steve Fair

     On Saturday, President Donald Trump signed an executive memorandum deploying 2,000 National Guard troops in California in response to protests in Los Angeles over the enforcement of illegal immigration. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the action is being done to support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles. Hegseth said if violence continued, active-duty Marines stationed at Camp Pendleton could also be mobilized.

The protests came after federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers raided multiple workplaces in L.A.’s fashion district and detained hundreds of illegal immigrates (those who enter and usually become established).

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, claims Trump’s action was a move to, “take over” the California National Guard (Trump’s right as Commander-in Chief). Newsom says deploying the National Guard is “purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.” Trump has threatened to cut federal funding to the Golden State for ignoring enforcement of his executive orders regarding illegal immigrates.  Newsom has said he would retaliate by withholding federal tax collected in the state.  “California pays the bills for the federal government,” Newsom said. 

      California is a donor state in regard to taxation. They pay over $80 billion more each year than they receive from the feds. It remains unclear if Trump and Newsom can legally withhold funding from the other. No one wins in a stalemate and it remains to be seen who will blink first.

Three observations:
First, the immigration issue is about votes. The Democratic Party has openly advocated for allowing illegal immigrates to be granted the right to vote. States with high levels of illegals affect the census, congressional apportionment and electoral college votes. If political power is shifted to states with high levels of illegal immigrates, America becomes bluer. That’s why Biden kept borders open. It is why Newsom encourages protests: it helps the Democratic Party cause.

Second, the immigration issue is about security. During Biden’s administration, the U.S. endured a large-scale invasion. Millions of illegal aliens from nations and regions around the world entered the U.S. Who knows how many potential terrorists, foreign spies, cartel members or other criminals are living here? A country with no border is not a country at all. Trump has closed the border and deporting illegal immigrants should be a nonpartisan issue, but it remains one of the most divisive debates of the day.

Third, the immigration issue is about the rule of law. The United States has clear immigration laws regarding how a person enters, stays and potentially becomes an American citizen. The inconsistency and unpredictability in enforcement by various administrations has been the challenge. Immigration enforcement should be applied fairly and consistently; it should not be ambiguous, inconclusive or obscure. The executive branch is charged with enforcing the law, not just the ones they like.

Americans want border security. A recent Gallup poll found more than 55% of Americans believe immigration law enforcement should be a priority for the federal government. Those same citizens support building more border walls and an increase in Border Patrol agents. Politically, illegal immigration is an issue that cuts across party affiliation. A majority of Democrats want a secure border. Most Americans support legal immigration, but not illegal immigration.

Newsom is considered a potential 2028 Democrat nominee for president. If he continues his mishandling of this situation, he will authenticate Trump’s nickname for him—Newscum—and dash his hopes to occupy the White House. After all, illegal is illegal.

    

LEGISLATURE HAS SHORTAGE OF INDEPENDENT CRITICAL THINKERS!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

BROUGHT AND PAID FOR

by Steve Fair

     The Oklahoma legislature went sine die (adjourned with no appointed date for readjournment) on Friday.  It was a session marked by new legislative leadership in both chambers.  After several sessions of contention between the state House and Senate, it appears collaboration improved between the two chambers.  Senate President Pro Tem Lonnie Paxton, (R-Tuttle) and House Speaker of the House Kyle Hilbert, (R-Bristow) appeared to sing off the same sheet of music, but Governor Kevin Stitt isn’t on the same sheet.  Stitt set a record for the number of vetoes in a session- 68.  That is twice more than the previous session. 

     Oklahoma lawmakers overrode 47 of the 68 vetoes- a state record.  Two more vetoes were overridden by the Senate, but were not voted on in the House. One veto was approved by the House but not voted on by the Senate before adjournment. 

     Legislators also took time out of overruling to pass a resolution formally removing Allie Friesen as head of the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health.  Friesen has been embattled since a state audit showed a $28 million dollar budget shortfall and struggled to make payroll.  Three observations about the 2025 session:

     First, special interests control the Oklahoma legislature.  Legislative candidates are   recruited, funded and equipped by trade associations, state agencies, and special interest groups.  Bear in mind- the listed groups represent people and have a right to lobby.  But also remember, a legislator’s allegiance/loyalty is primarily to those who got them into office.  Once elected, elected officials tend to kowtow to those they came to the dance with. 

     The number of independent, critical thinking lawmakers has dwindled to a handful.  Group think and conformity now guide state lawmaker votes.  They punch the button, not based on convictions and values, but on fraternity.  The predictability of how a lawmaker will vote is based on their crew/clique/pack/circle/caucus and any individualistic thought is not tolerated.  Rarely do any wander off the reservation and vote independently. Citizens should make it their mission to find out who funded their elected official’s campaigns.  Those are who they listen to- not to the people in their district. 

     Second, Stitt should have fired Friesen.  Instead of the legislature spending time with the issue, the governor should have done his job and sent her packing.  After the audit was released, it was clear Friesen was in over her head.  The governor called the removal a ‘politically motivated witch hunt,’ and that he had tasked Commissioner Friesen with bringing accountability and transparency to the agency.  Stitt claims the mismanagement of the Oklahoma Mental Health Agency goes back more than a decade.  The truth is Stitt has been in office 6 of those 10 years, which means much of the dereliction has happened on his watch. 

     Third, Oklahomans are confused about their state government.  Who can blame them?  Republicans hold super majorities in both chambers and the governor is a Republican.  Yet the legislature and the governor fight like cats and dogs, debating who is the most conservative? 

     Positioning, posturing, self-promoting braggarts on both ends of the political spectrum play to their base, while average Oklahomans have no voice because they don’t have a lobbyist at the Capitol.  The average citizen doesn’t know what to believe.  Special interest groups ‘spin’ the message, demonize opponents and demand loyalty from their blind kiwis.  They shout down free speech, quote scripture and sing O How I Love Jesus, while showing no respect for an opposing opinion.  It is no wonder Oklahoma has a deplorable voter turnout record.  The average Oklahoma voter is disgusted with that garbage and too busy working to care about their state government anymore. 

      Some of Stitt’s vetoes were political and should have been overridden.  Others that were overturned were bills special interests wanted.  After all, they paid a lot of money to get it done.  Voters should find out who their legislator and governor work for because it’s likely it ain’t for them.